If you visit the island of Malta today you will
find an inlet that is called St. Pauls Bay. Ancient tradition has hallowed this bay
as the site of Pauls shipwreck. The earliest document mentioning this tradition was
written more than four hundred years after Pauls shipwreck. However, given the
bearing on which their ship was drifting, this bay is the first possible point of contact
that they would have had with the island of Malta. Also, there is other evidence that
points to this bay as the scene of the shipwreck.

Luke states that at midnight on the fourteenth day the sailors sensed that
they were near land. This is a curious statement. Accomplished seamen are sometimes able
tosmell land while it is far away, but the gale driving them would not have permitted land
smells to reach their vessel. It is possible that they dimly heard the sound of waves
crashing against the shore, but this must remain a conjecture since Luke does not say why
they thought land was nearby.

Interestingly, we have the record of a nineteenth century British court
martial that deals with a shipwreck in St. Pauls Bay. The circumstances of the wreck
are not quite the same as those found in Acts. While the British ships approach to
the bay was also at night, there was no storm. The shipwreck was caused by the negligence
of those on watch. But the general course of the British ship was the same as Pauls
vessel eighteen centuries before. Both approached the bay from the east.

For a ship to enter St. Pauls Bay from that direction, it first must
pass close to the Point of Koura, which juts out into the surrounding sea. It was at this
point that the British lookout was first aware that land was nearby, since he could see
the surf crashing against the Point. The gale that was driving Pauls ship would have
made the surf even more visible and the breakers would have been heard even before they
were seen. Perhaps this is what Luke meant when he said that the sailors
"sensed" that land was nearby. (15)

Luke records that, following this, the sailors dropped a line and measured twenty fathoms.
A little further on, they dropped the line again and found fifteen fathoms. Now any ship
that nears land will first pass over twenty fathoms, then over fifteen, as it closes with
the shore. But the route of Pauls ship was more complicated than simply closing with
the shore. His vessel was not headed directly toward Malta, but was drifting leeward on a
course almost parallel to it.

For the ship to have entered St. Pauls Bay on this course, it would
have had to pass within a quarter mile of Koura Point. You can follow the approximate line
of the ships drift on the map of St. Pauls Bay. Within a quarter mile of
passing Koura Point, there is an average depth of twenty fathoms. A little farther west
lies the fifteen fathom mark. Again, it needs to be emphasized that these depths are not
found on a course that is closing with the island, but on one almost parallel to it.

Luke says that, when the sailors sounded fifteen fathoms, they threw out
the anchors because of fear that they would end up on the rocks. You will notice, on the
map of St. Pauls Bay, that Salmonetta island is just west of Koura Point, about one
quarter mile west of the fifteen fathom mark. This small island is made up of breakers
that would not only have been heard at this point, but would have been seen. Their only
possible chance for avoiding shipwreck was to try to anchor the ship and halt their drift
until morning. At daybreak, they would be able to see whether it was possible to beach the
vessel on shore. (16)

An attempt to anchor in the teeth of a gale is always an act of
desperation. The anchors of ancient ships were incapable of holding in most bays during a
storm. But the bottom of St. Pauls Bay has a clay of unusual characteristics. This
is remarked upon in official British navy sailing directions from the nineteenth century.
The directions state that anchors in St. Pauls Bay will never pull loose, no matter
how bad the storm, because of the local clay. This is an unusual environmental condition.

Luke states that they anchored the ship from the stern. Sailing ships,
both ancient and modern, anchor from the front, or prow, since it is impossible to
maneuver a ship that is anchored from the stern. But it makes sense that they would anchor
from the stern in this case, since the wind would then swing the front of the ship around
and point it directly into the bay. In the morning, after looking for the best place to
run aground, they could cut the anchors loose and drive the ship onto the beach. If they
had anchored from the front of the vessel, with the rear facing toward the shore, they
would not have had time to turn the ship around to face the shore and would have capsized.

Luke does not tell us why the anchoring was done from the stern. We
discover the reason by analyzing the nautical evidence. Ancient literary sources reveal
that this technique of anchoring from the stern was known. Appian reports that Rome won a
naval battle against the Carthaginians by using this tactic, their ships suddenly wheeling
in unison to meet the enemy. In the nineteenth century, Lord Nelson won the battle of the
Nile against the French by this maneuver. (17)

At this point in Lukes narrative, a short drama occurs. Some of the
sailors let down the ships boat under the pretense of laying more anchors, but their
real intention is to escape. Some scholars have argued that this episode must be
fictional, since it would have been suicide for the sailors to make for an unknown shore
at night on stormy seas. The argument is valid  it would have been suicide 
but this does not mean that it did not happen. After all, the anchors holding the ship
could have given way at any time during the night, or the ship might have begun breaking
up under the pounding of the waves. They had been running in a gale for fourteen days, so
the ship must have been in very poor condition. An attempt to make for shore may have
seemed worth the risk. (18)

At dawn, none of the sailors recognized the coastline. Since Maltas
harbor was on the other side of the island, this was understandable. Even sailors who had
been to Malta would have had no reason to recognize this particular bay.

Luke records that there was a sandy beach facing them. The modern St.
Pauls Bay does not have a sandy beach, but it is geologically possible that there
was one two thousand years ago.

In preparation for
running aground, the sailors cut the anchor ropes, untied the steering oars, then raised a
sail on the prow. These details fit what we know about the handling of ancient ships.
There were two steering oars in the stern that acted as rudders. For the ship to have been
successfully anchored from the stern the previous night, those oars would have to have
been lifted out of the water and lashed together. Luke did not mention that this occurred
the night before, but he now reveals that it happened by saying that they untied the oars.
The raising of the foresail makes sense, since the mainsail yard-arm had probably long
since disappeared in the storm. The small foresail would give the ship some
maneuverability.

In verse forty-one, Luke states that the ship ran aground on a sandbank.
However, Lukes Greek can be translated in more than one way. It can mean a sandbank,
a shallows, or, more literally, "a place of two seas." This last phrase denotes
two bodies of water separated by a sandbar. In St. Pauls Bay, there is a narrow
inlet of water between Salmonetta island and the Malta mainland. If they ran aground on a
sandbank near this inlet, and this is the likeliest place for them to have run aground, it
could legitimately be called "a place of two seas." (19)

According to Luke, the front of the ship went aground, but did not break up. It remained
intact while the rear gradually disintegrated under the force of the waves. The passengers
made their way ashore either by swimming or by floating on pieces of the vessel.
Miraculously, there was no loss of life.

This is a very unusual event. For a wooden ship to embed itself in a
sandbar without breaking apart, it must run into a mud that will slow it down, then its
hull must lodge in a clay tenacious enough to hold it in place. As previously noted, St.
Pauls Bay possesses a clay capable of this. However, it is unusual to find mud at
the depth of a ships hull close to a shore. Mud can be found where a creek empties
into the sea, but even then it is usually carried away by the current. Only under certain
conditions is the water close to shore calm enough for a deposit to form at hull level. As
it happens, St. Pauls Bay contains two creeks, as well as the necessary conditions
for mud to form near the shoreline.

In short, there are two unusual geological conditions in St. Pauls
bay, both of which are necessary for the event that Luke describes. (20)